Hazel Grove - General Political Discussion

[Bowden Guy]

Andy, I absolutely agree with you that the 'better off' should pay their 'fair share". It's good to know, therefore, that the top 10% of taxpayers pay over 55% of all income tax collected.

I would be very interested to know what % figure you personally believe would be "fairer"', assuming it would be somewhere between 55% and 100%?

[Duke Fame]

Hold on,

I pay around £800 a month in direct taxes, much more through regressive indirect forms, even if every penny was in my pocket as Thatcher wanted there is no way I could afford to live, educate my children, be ill at any point in my life, have a pension or even dream of retirement, let alone do the things that enrich ones existence such as enjoy the arts or have a social life.

There are more than enough resources and wealth in the world to go round. The ordinary folks at the bottom - that's pretty much every single person in the constituency - need to demand that those who are not paying their fair share do so.

The whole neo-liberal / advanced capitalism concept is flawed. Instead of responding to the issue all you can say is:

A the Bulgarians did it.
B the poor did it
C the poor Bulgarians did it
D it doesn't matter who did it you'll have to suffer for it.
E they don't look like you, i bet they did it.

I'm pretty much in the neo-liberal school of thought, I don't think I've ever said any of that.

I am all for a state education and as we're so far in, a universal NHS free at the point of delivery for core health services.

I do however, believe that we should all be left with as much of our earnings in our pocket in order to do what we choose. If we choose to have kids, we pay for it. If we like cakes, we pay for it.

[andy+kirsty]

Hold on,

I pay around £800 a month in direct taxes, much more through regressive indirect forms, even if every penny was in my pocket as Thatcher wanted there is no way I could afford to live, educate my children, be ill at any point in my life, have a pension or even dream of retirement, let alone do the things that enrich ones existence such as enjoy the arts or have a social life.

There are more than enough resources and wealth in the world to go round. The ordinary folks at the bottom - that's pretty much every single person in the constituency - need to demand that those who are not paying their fair share do so.

The whole neo-liberal / advanced capitalism concept is flawed. Instead of responding to the issue all you can say is:

A the Bulgarians did it.
B the poor did it
C the poor Bulgarians did it
D it doesn't matter who did it you'll have to suffer for it.
E they don't look like you, i bet they did it.

[simonesaffron]

Duke,

You and I are always going to disagree on both the importance and the value of good public services, and if I step into that argument you'll only dig out some obscure anecdote about a labour controlled London borough where they have an ambassador for left - handed Japanese jellyfish on £40.000 per annum. So if you don't mind, on this occasion I'll stay out of that one and save you the research.


Wheels,

No argument with your assertion. The LD's have established by a mile the best political organisation. That's certainly the case in Marple, I'll accept your word that it's also the case in Hazel Grove and it is probably the case in the whole of Stockport, that's probably why they run it. I'll even accept that they do a decent job under very difficult circumstances and I've already said that I expect local Councillors in Marple to be returned. You're also correct, Political Organisations do win elections.

However the HG parliamentary seat lives in unprecedented times.

The electorate has not yet given its verdict on the LD's in coalition, it will have its chance next May. Dave says that 'most people' now sympathise with the LD's in coalition but we don't actually know that. There is also the obvious disadvantage of no Sir Andrew for the LD's. This absence has in effect created a level playing field for all candidates and in my view this time it  it will be candidate and not party that wins Hazel Grove.
 
In Manchester before the coalition there were around 30 plus LD councillors now there are none. Nationwide since the coalition the LD's have lost 2000+ councillors. I personally think that the LD's were all right in coalition if only in recognising that they pegged the Conservatives back, but I think the damage done to the party has been grossly underestimated by the LD leadership. 

I make no predictions yet, but the fact that it is a hard one to call when in previous years it was a foregone conclusion speaks very loudly for itself.     

 

[Duke Fame]

Fortunately the majority of the electorate appear to take a different view, judging from the latest (post-Autumn statement) opinion polls, which put the Tories at 28% - the lowest of either of the two major parties since Michael Foot's Labour Party 30 years ago!

Fortunately??? why would anyone want to have the public taxed for anything but core services unless you work for the council and it's providing a cushy livelihood at taxpayer's expense.

So far, the cuts have simply removed some of the fat within local authorities. The 'nice to have' services rather than essential services, there are still a lot of these 'nice to have' roles left and lots of middle management roles that can go.

Since the cuts, public opinion has actually shown services to have improved!!

Privatised NHS services also show a better service than before.

[Dave]

Personally, I'd have services cut to the core ..... huge cuts are needed (IMHO rightly so)

Fortunately the majority of the electorate appear to take a different view, judging from the latest (post-Autumn statement) opinion polls, which put the Tories at 28% - the lowest of either of the two major parties since Michael Foot's Labour Party 30 years ago! 

[Duke Fame]

All right Duke,

Forget the word austerity, let's replace it with this phrase (from the OED definition of the word)   "..difficult economic conditions created by government measures to reduce a budget deficit, especially by reducing public expenditure..."

Would you agree that, that is exactly what the Conservatives have done in this parliament? If you don't then you must inhabit a place that I've never been to.

More to the current situation, the question is, is do you want more of it ? It seems that you do. So if you do vote Conservative, I'm not trying to stop you. All I'm saying is that they don't seem to have anything else in the locker other than the reduction of public expenditure.

There has been a shift, the spending has been on projects rather than services, to me this is fine and far better than simply get the populous even more reliant on the state than it already is.

Road building, rail, airport spending is all good and will give the economy a comparative advantage in time.

The cost of services still exceeds the 2007 level of spending and that year is hardly noted as a low point in services. Personally, I'd have services cut to the core and allow the taxpayer retain as much of their own money to spend as they wish. furthermore, the savings so far have just scratched the surface, huge cuts are needed (IMHO rightly so) no mater what flavour of party is in charge and this is my biggest doubt around the Labour party which has promised all sorts and frankly lied.

I expect a coalition in the next government and think the LD's will still hold a balance of power despite having a far lower vote (irony for the PR fans). I hope they go with the Conservatives but I worry.

[Dave]

Simone talks a lot of sense, as she frequently does.  Although she's maybe a tad harsh about the Lib Dems and their 'treachery' over tuition fees.  After all, they went into a coalition, which most people accept was the right thing to do at the time.  That meant negotiating a compromise set of policies and priorities.  You win some, you lose some, and rightly or wrongly, the Lib Dems conceded the tuition fee issue to their coalition partners.   As Nick Clegg has since admitted, their mistake was making the unconditional 'no fees' commitment in the first place.

As for this:

What matters on polling day and in the period leading up to it is who has the best organisation for it is party organisation that wins the day.

...it's a pretty depressing point of view, isn't it, to suggest that the policies and the competence of the parties and their candidates is less important than 'who has the best organisation'.

As Simone rightly says, in this constituency  'the outcome is more open than it has ever been,'  so in a close run contest, it could come down to the personal attributes of the candidates, which would be a refreshing change, I guess.     

Nationally the outcome is also far from predictable, but for what it's worth, my money is on a Labour/SNP coalition. Alec Salmond for Deputy Prime Minister, anyone?   

[wheels]

The elections in prospect are a strange animal indeed. Apart from those with former party allegiance who would vote for a donkey providing it wore the right colour, little guidance is offered to the open-minded voter.

IMHO local elections in Marple are fairly straight forward and I can see nothing else but Liberal Democrat ward candidates being returned and on balance probably deserving to be returned.

Hazel Grove Constituency though is a different story altogether and the outcome is more open than it has ever been.

Leaving aside the candidates for a moment if you consider the parties.

Conservative: Don't seem to have any answers to anything other than austerity and to blame the previous labour administration for everything from immigration to the economy. Can't be trusted with the NHS.

Labour: Inspire no confidence whatsoever with anything to do with money in general and particularly not the welfare state. It should never be about one person but I cannot think of a more square peg potential Prime Minister since I have been following politics. The fact that the party has picked such a leader over the one it could have had is in itself an alarm bell situation.

LibDem: Whatever their follower's protestations they are facing wipeout nationally, though perhaps not in Hazel Grove. The party has almost been destroyed by the ambitions of a few, it is hard to follow or fathom such leadership and if you vote LibDem who do you actually get, although this time their numbers returning will be so small that there will be no point in them being in a coalition so you might actually get the real them, their treachery over tuition fees is not forgotten, it is very perplexing.

Ukip: The politics of anger. Definitely not the future probably the past, 1930's isolationist policies which would probably bring about 1930's conditions. Lives in the land of the British Empire, only we don't have one anymore. One to avoid as a rule yet, seems to have candid leadership and an element of trustworthiness.

As I say it isn't clear and it isn't easy. The candidates will be all important in Hazel Grove but with 4 months to the election who are they? Oh we know their names and a little background but not much else.

With respect Simone your review in my view looks at the wrong issues. What matters on polling day and in the period leading up to it is who has the best organisation for it is party organisation that wins the day. Far and away the best machine in HG is the Lib Dem machine and for the others to challange that they need to build similar sized memberships and structure. Its most likely too late to do that for next year now but that is where they have to start.

[simonesaffron]

All right Duke,

Forget the word austerity, let's replace it with this phrase (from the OED definition of the word)   "..difficult economic conditions created by government measures to reduce a budget deficit, especially by reducing public expenditure..."

Would you agree that, that is exactly what the Conservatives have done in this parliament? If you don't then you must inhabit a place that I've never been to.

More to the current situation, the question is, is do you want more of it ? It seems that you do. So if you do vote Conservative, I'm not trying to stop you. All I'm saying is that they don't seem to have anything else in the locker other than the reduction of public expenditure.   

[Duke Fame]

Conservative: Don't seem to have any answers to anything other than austerity and to blame the previous labour administration for everything from immigration to the economy. Can't be trusted with the NHS.

With respect, that's nonsense. Perhaps it's been with Lib Dem influence but there has been very little austerity. There has been a shift from spending on services into spending on infrastructure which really gives a long-term benefit as opposed to something where you turn the keynesian taps off and everything crumbles.

Yes, there is a lot of austerity to come, hopefully the stimulus efforts to date should mean more in work etc.

[simonesaffron]

The elections in prospect are a strange animal indeed. Apart from those with former party allegiance who would vote for a donkey providing it wore the right colour, little guidance is offered to the open-minded voter.

IMHO local elections in Marple are fairly straight forward and I can see nothing else but Liberal Democrat ward candidates being returned and on balance probably deserving to be returned.

Hazel Grove Constituency though is a different story altogether and the outcome is more open than it has ever been.

Leaving aside the candidates for a moment if you consider the parties.

Conservative: Don't seem to have any answers to anything other than austerity and to blame the previous labour administration for everything from immigration to the economy. Can't be trusted with the NHS.

Labour: Inspire no confidence whatsoever with anything to do with money in general and particularly not the welfare state. It should never be about one person but I cannot think of a more square peg potential Prime Minister since I have been following politics. The fact that the party has picked such a leader over the one it could have had is in itself an alarm bell situation.

LibDem: Whatever their follower's protestations they are facing wipeout nationally, though perhaps not in Hazel Grove. The party has almost been destroyed by the ambitions of a few, it is hard to follow or fathom such leadership and if you vote LibDem who do you actually get, although this time their numbers returning will be so small that there will be no point in them being in a coalition so you might actually get the real them, their treachery over tuition fees is not forgotten, it is very perplexing.

Ukip: The politics of anger. Definitely not the future probably the past, 1930's isolationist policies which would probably bring about 1930's conditions. Lives in the land of the British Empire, only we don't have one anymore. One to avoid as a rule yet, seems to have candid leadership and an element of trustworthiness.

As I say it isn't clear and it isn't easy. The candidates will be all important in Hazel Grove but with 4 months to the election who are they? Oh we know their names and a little background but not much else.